mentalgymnast wrote:Whether or not this is true, I really don't know without proof or documentation. At this point I'd have to take your word for it. The two links I provided, however, give some credence to the idea that Jacob 5 isn't anachronistic.
You realize that you cannot ask someone to prove a claim that something doesn't exist right? In order to do that they would have to show you everything in existence to show it's not there. That's impossible. All you have to do is show that it did exist to prove the claims wrong.
To focus on whether you think that Jacob 5 is anachronistic is an interesting side topic...but it doesn't negate the fact that Jacob 5 is THERE and from what I've been able to see/read along the way, it seems as though it wasn't simply 'whipped up' on the fly while Joseph had his head in a hat.
If you ever want to have a good chance of finding the truth, you have to look at both sides. This statement shows you do not do so with LDS truth claims. If one does so they have to admit Joseph had years to prepare the Book of Mormon project and that the claimed production was out of site from everyone except Oliver. You might also realize the Book of Mormon text you read is not the text of the original. It had to be highly edited to make sense.
Mormon's revere Joseph as God's chosen Prophet who was foreordained to lead the final Restoration of the one true Church yet don't believe he was capable of writing a book, even with help from friends and even though he demonstrated a significant creativity and capacity for story telling from an early age.
There is no supporting evidence for the conclusion that the Book of Mormon is God-Given other than MG cannot explain to his own satisfaction how Joseph might have done it, even though it's been pointed out very eloquently how Joseph might have done it.
On the same basis that MG/Callister concluded the Book of Mormon is God-Given, one can legitimately conclude it was Satan-Given....or Zeuss-Given, or Thetan-Given or...well, you get the point.
Tad Callister is intellectually dishonest and tries to disingenuously manipulate how young people think about the Book of Mormon in order to keep them in the boat.
Special mention should be given to MG's behaviorial deterioration as the thread, his thread, progressed. It's a consistent pattern.
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')
The first time it came up was on the old MAD board and someone had linked to a source similar to those MG shared. For whatever reason it struck me as odd that the source talked about how amazing Zeno's knowledge was and what it said about the ancient Israelite practices. But it seemed very uncharacteristic of apologists to not take even the slightest glimmer of a source and stretch it out to show how amazing the parallel ancient practices were to the Book of Mormon. Originally, I suspected there were minor but potentially meaningful differences that they didn't want to see brought up. So I went looking. And looked, and looked and looked. Then I asked what sources those who found Jacob 5 so amazing could point to. That turned out to be the most illuminating because it became clear they hadn't thought about this as a potential issue but couldn't discount it with actual source material. Everything I could find suggested olive grafting was a Greek practice that proliferated with their conquests and expansion though various forms of other olive cultivation practices may or may not have existed in various forms throughout the developing world. Not finding a compelling source for Jacob 5 in the past and having recently read The Botany of Desire which dwelt a lot on the apple in frontier America, I went to sources regarding apple cultivation to see how they aligned and it appeared familiarity with apple grafting could account for the supposed unique knowledge of Jacob 5.
So, every so often when it comes back up, which it seems to periodically for the same reasons MG brought it up, it's fun to revisit it and see if the apologists have finally found a scrap of something they can "tapir = horse" to address ancient Israeli olive grafting that actually aligns with the text of Jacob 5. Doesn't look promising, does it?
Your story is fascinating, honorentheos. It adds another extremely solid piece of evidence to the concept of Joseph Smith' story-telling ability being firmly anchored in his 19th century life. He really was a product of his culture. I hope you have written all this up somewhere, or at least have saved your posts here. It's one thing to see your results all laid out, but I think the process of how you came to this understanding is equally fascinating.
Thanks for the links! My home library has a pretty hefty horticultural section due to my own interests in that area, so I especially enjoyed exploring the Botany of Desire site. It's very well done and quite fascinating. The paper from Purdue was a great read also. It's been fun learning about this tonight- your efforts are much appreciated-- by me at least if not by mentalgymnast! I think you gave him a knowledge-induced headache; he, as usual, was suddenly needed elsewhere just as you disproved his argument.
The point is that grafting olives to sweeten the fruit is likely anachronistic as the technology was present in early China but essentially first practiced by the Greeks in the old world. Prior to that the middle eastern Semitic cultures would practice olive cultivation and harvesting but having had this debate with a number of apologists over multiple years they’ve failed to come up with a credible source showing that the Nephites could have left the middle east for the Americas around 600 BCE with scriptural documentation of something that wasn’t brought to the area until after the Persians fell to the Greeks centuries later.
That makes Jacob 5 a liability. It doesn’t matter how much you enjoy it. If it couldn’t have been written in the time frame it is purported to have originated then it seems you are enjoying something composed in the 19th century.
You are, of course, welcome to find a source that demonstrates the pre-exilic Israelites practiced not just olive cultivation, but grafting that was for producing sweet fruit from bitter stock.
On the other hand, this was a very common practice for frontier Americans with apples. Apples grown from seed were not true to their parentage and could turn out to be bitter when they produced fruit. Grafting known sweet grafts onto the stock of non-sweet apples was something the Smiths would have been familiar with. Mother Smith describes their care of apples to enough degree in her biographical writings to make this clear.
Jacob 5 is a liability, scoring a point for 19th century authorship.
Olive Culture in Ancient Israel by David Eitam
David Eitam is an archeologist who specialized in ancient industries of the Holy Land.
“The olive tree and its oil have been major components in the culture and rituals of Ancient Israel and the economy of its inhabitants throughout history. Its prominent status is revealed by numerous verses in the Old Testament, the Mishnah and the Talmud.
“The olive tree served as a symbol of beauty (Isaiah 11, 16), freshness and fertility "your sons are like shoots of olive around your table" (Psalms). In the Yotam fable the olive tree was the first to be chosen as a king (Judges 9,8). The Holy Land and the olive tree are one "land of olive and oil" (Deut 8, 8). Contrary to the vineyard and its grapes, the attributes of the olive tree are not widespread among the toponymies of ancient Israel. The reason for this is merely that "olive trees will be [and indeed were] growing everywhere" (Deut 28, 40).
“The olive was a great necessity for man’s existence. The fruit and its oil were major diet constituents. Descriptions of ritual offerings and sacrifices in the Bible reveal that this was the most frequent use, as is indicated in the Talmud and the Mishnah. The most prevalent individual (daily!) meal, five different baked or unbaked menus Leviticus 2:4, 5, - 14; 15 contained grain or flour mixed, or smeared with oil (proportion 3:1 Ezekiel 45,14).
“The cultivated olive was forbidden to be cut because of its economical importance, as documented in many regulations for the protection of the trees "Rabbi Meir said: every tree that does not bear fruit except the olive and the fig [may be cut]" (Mishnah Kila'im 6, 5). However, wild olive trees were commonly used as wood for building, in the ancient periods.
“The first and only conclusive evidence for the preliminary production of olive oil from wild olive trees dates to the Neolithic Pottery period, the sixth millennium BCE. A basin dug in a clay layer in the seashore off Mt. Carmel, was found full of olive pits and organic material. It seems that the oil was produced there in an ancient, traditional method called "Shemen Rahutz" (ancient Hebrew) or "Zeit Taphakh" (Palestinian Arabic). In addition to this botanic evidence of olive pits, dozens of uniform special installations cut in the rock surface proved the existence of advanced preliminary oil production.
“Olive trees were cultivated in Israel during the 4th millenium BC. Permanent small villages based on mixed economy of herd growing and agriculture existed in the Mediterranean regions of the country, Golan and Samaria Hills.” Link
Some people are ignorant, and some take pride in their ignorance. You appear to be of the latter kind.
mentalgymnast wrote:Jacob 5 is just one example...
...of a likely anachronism in the Book of Mormon. Without a source showing this tech actual existed in the timeframe when the Brass Plates would have been composed and not brought to the region by the Greeks you are ignoring a problem with the authorship. Authorship being primary, this suggests the author was more likely to have lived in the 19th c. Americas and was describing apple cultivation which did exist in the time and place when Smith and Cowdery wrote it.
“Likely” doesn’t cut it. If you believe that this horticultural technique didn’t exist in ancient Israel within the timeframe of the Book of Mormon, the burden is on you to prove it, not on us to disprove it.
honorentheos wrote:Do you realize what you just asked?
You just asked me to prove to you something that isn't attested to in the actual non-BoM record.
Go back and read your links. They comment time and again at how amazing the knowledge is that Zenos and his people demonstrate that others of the time might not have. Why? Maybe it's because others of the time outside of China didn't have the knowledge. They're assuming the Book of Zeno is real and then composing an argument. The tech did not exist at the time in a place that would have made its way into the Brass Plates. Have fun finding a non-LDS source that will back you up.
You haven't demonstrated anything more than that this is an anachronism still.
Again, the Book of Mormon asserts that the technique was known. If it is your contention that it wasn’t, the burden is on you to prove your case, not on us to disprove it.
The point is that grafting olives to sweeten the fruit is likely anachronistic as the technology was present in early China but essentially first practiced by the Greeks in the old world. Prior to that the middle eastern Semitic cultures would practice olive cultivation and harvesting but having had this debate with a number of apologists over multiple years they’ve failed to come up with a credible source showing that the Nephites could have left the middle east for the Americas around 600 BCE with scriptural documentation of something that wasn’t brought to the area until after the Persians fell to the Greeks centuries later.
That makes Jacob 5 a liability. It doesn’t matter how much you enjoy it. If it couldn’t have been written in the time frame it is purported to have originated then it seems you are enjoying something composed in the 19th century.
You are, of course, welcome to find a source that demonstrates the pre-exilic Israelites practiced not just olive cultivation, but grafting that was for producing sweet fruit from bitter stock.
On the other hand, this was a very common practice for frontier Americans with apples. Apples grown from seed were not true to their parentage and could turn out to be bitter when they produced fruit. Grafting known sweet grafts onto the stock of non-sweet apples was something the Smiths would have been familiar with. Mother Smith describes their care of apples to enough degree in her biographical writings to make this clear.
Jacob 5 is a liability, scoring a point for 19th century authorship.
zerinus wrote:Olive Culture in Ancient Israel by David Eitam
David Eitam is an archeologist who specialized in ancient industries of the Holy Land.
<text which says nothing whatsoever about grafting olives>
Some people are ignorant, and some take pride in their ignorance. You appear to be of the latter kind.
Zerinus misses the point. The cultivation of the olive is not the anachronism complained of. It's the references to grafting, which did not reach the ancient Israelites before the Lehi party left for America. That's absolutely plain to anybody who reads what honorentheos wrote.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Exiled wrote:I saw your prior argument where you say if one can't show how Joseph Smith did it, then by default it came from god. That argument is simply preposterous. This is why I think you're here to just cause drama. You know posters here want good evidence and arguments based in reality but you bring this s$%t here anyway. Do you really believe that if one cannot show how Joseph Smith did his magic trick in creating the Book of Mormon, then by default it came from god? Is that what you really believe?
Joseph Smith claimed that it came from God. There were witnesses. First three witnesses, followed by eight witnesses. If you claim otherwise, the burden of proof is on you, otherwise his claim stands.
We also have pretty good historical data regarding the case. We know about those who were involved, and their descriptions of the events, all of which support his account. Again, if you claim otherwise, the burden of proof is on you, not on us. And I suggest you take your further bull-s$%t elsewhere.
Exiled wrote:I saw your prior argument where you say if one can't show how Joseph Smith did it, then by default it came from god. That argument is simply preposterous. This is why I think you're here to just cause drama. You know posters here want good evidence and arguments based in reality but you bring this s$%t here anyway. Do you really believe that if one cannot show how Joseph Smith did his magic trick in creating the Book of Mormon, then by default it came from god? Is that what you really believe?
zerinus, summarised by Chap wrote:<YES>
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
honorentheos wrote:Look, MG. If you go to a known source in Romans where olive grafting is used as a symbol, it also makes cultural sense. If you read the parable in Romans, it describes grafting to restore vigor to a tree so it can produce fruit for the purpose of the time. And this in a culture and time when tame olives would be used for olive oil for eating rather than for other purposes.
But the Book of Jacob tells us this -
31 And it came to pass that the Lord of the vineyard did taste of the fruit, every sort according to its number. And the Lord of the vineyard said: Behold, this long time have we nourished this tree, and I have laid up unto myself against the season much fruit. ... 52 Wherefore, let us take of the branches of these which I have planted in the nethermost parts of my vineyard, and let us graft them into the tree from whence they came; and let us pluck from the tree those branches whose fruit is most bitter, and graft in the natural branches of the tree in the stead thereof. ... 63 Graft in the branches; begin at the last that they may be first, and that the first may be last, and dig about the trees, both old and young, the first and the last; and the last and the first, that all may be nourished once again for the last time.
65 And as they begin to grow ye shall clear away the branches which bring forth bitter fruit, according to the strength of the good and the size thereof; and ye shall not clear away the bad thereof all at once, lest the roots thereof should be too strong for the graft, and the graft thereof shall perish, and I lose the trees of my vineyard.
What does it mean to store up olives? Let's start with you running that down. When the master of the vineyard is tasting fruit to "lay up unto himself", how does that correspond with ancient olive cultivation and use?
The expression used is to “lay up fruit against the season,” which simply means to harvest the fruit when the harvest time arrives.
On the flip side, considering apples being stored in a cellar was a relatively common practice how do you think this makes more sense when transposed into an ancient middle-eastern culture prior to Hellenistic influence?
So your argument is that because North Americans in the time of Joseph Smith knew how to store apples, the Israelites didn’t know how to store their olives? So what do you think they did their olives once they had harvested them? You reckon they sat down and consumed them instantly? They didn’t leave some for tomorrow?
Parables include tells about the cultures they actual come from. The Book of Mormon includes tell after tell pointing to the 19th c. frontier, and issue after issue when it pretends to be describing an ancient culture.
Authorship being primary, what does this tell us about it's authorship?
It tells us that you are talking an awful lot of crap and don’t even know it.
